170 likes | 318 Views
Remember. Performance is specific to a particular program/s Total execution time is a consistent summary of performance For a given architecture performance increases come from: increases in clock rate (without adverse CPI affects) improvements in processor organization that lower CPI
E N D
Remember • Performance is specific to a particular program/s • Total execution time is a consistent summary of performance • For a given architecture performance increases come from: • increases in clock rate (without adverse CPI affects) • improvements in processor organization that lower CPI • compiler enhancements that lower CPI and/or instruction count • Algorithm/Language choices that affect instruction count • Pitfall: expecting improvement in one aspect of a machine’s performance to affect the total performance
operation a ALU 32 result 32 b 32 Lets Build a Processor • Almost ready to move into chapter 5 and start building a processor • First, let’s review Boolean Logic and build the ALU we’ll need (Material from Appendix B)
Review: Boolean Algebra & Gates • Problem: Consider a logic function with three inputs: A, B, and C. Output D is true if at least one input is true Output E is true if exactly two inputs are true Output F is true only if all three inputs are true • Show the truth table for these three functions. • Show the Boolean equations for these three functions. • Show an implementation consisting of inverters, AND, and OR gates.
operation op a b res result An ALU (arithmetic logic unit) • Let's build an ALU to support the andi and ori instructions • we'll just build a 1 bit ALU, and use 32 of them • Possible Implementation (sum-of-products): a b
S A C B Review: The Multiplexor • Selects one of the inputs to be the output, based on a control input • Lets build our ALU using a MUX: note: we call this a 2-input mux even though it has 3 inputs! 0 1
Different Implementations • Not easy to decide the “best” way to build something • Don't want too many inputs to a single gate • Don’t want to have to go through too many gates • for our purposes, ease of comprehension is important • Let's look at a 1-bit ALU for addition: • How could we build a 1-bit ALU for add, and, and or? • How could we build a 32-bit ALU? cout = a b + a cin + b cin sum = a xor b xor cin
What about subtraction (a – b) ? • Two's complement approach: just negate b and add. • How do we negate? • A very clever solution:
Adding a NOR function • Can also choose to invert a. How do we get “a NOR b” ?
Tailoring the ALU to the MIPS • Need to support the set-on-less-than instruction (slt) • remember: slt is an arithmetic instruction • produces a 1 if rs < rt and 0 otherwise • use subtraction: (a-b) < 0 implies a < b • Need to support test for equality (beq $t5, $t6, $t7) • use subtraction: (a-b) = 0 implies a = b
Supporting slt • Can we figure out the idea? all other bits Use this ALU for most significant bit
Test for equality • Notice control lines:0000 = and0001 = or0010 = add0110 = subtract0111 = slt1100 = NOR • Note: zero is a 1 when the result is zero!
Conclusion • We can build an ALU to support the MIPS instruction set • key idea: use multiplexor to select the output we want • we can efficiently perform subtraction using two’s complement • we can replicate a 1-bit ALU to produce a 32-bit ALU • Important points about hardware • all of the gates are always working • the speed of a gate is affected by the number of inputs to the gate • the speed of a circuit is affected by the number of gates in series (on the “critical path” or the “deepest level of logic”) • Our primary focus: comprehension, however, • Clever changes to organization can improve performance (similar to using better algorithms in software) • We saw this in multiplication, let’s look at addition now
Problem: ripple carry adder is slow • Is a 32-bit ALU as fast as a 1-bit ALU? • Is there more than one way to do addition? • two extremes: ripple carry and sum-of-products Can you see the ripple? How could you get rid of it? c1 = b0c0 + a0c0 +a0b0 c2 = b1c1 + a1c1 +a1b1 c2 = c3 = b2c2 + a2c2 +a2b2 c3 = c4 = b3c3 + a3c3 +a3b3 c4 = Not feasible! Why?
Carry-lookahead adder • An approach in-between our two extremes • Motivation: • If we didn't know the value of carry-in, what could we do? • When would we always generate a carry? gi = ai bi • When would we propagate the carry? pi = ai + bi • Did we get rid of the ripple? c1 = g0 + p0c0 c2 = g1 + p1c1 c2 = c3 = g2 + p2c2 c3 = c4 = g3 + p3c3 c4 =Feasible! Why?
Use principle to build bigger adders • Can’t build a 16 bit adder this way... (too big) • Could use ripple carry of 4-bit CLA adders • Better: use the CLA principle again!